On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 05:44:06AM -0700, Daniel Stodden wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 05:39 -0500, Daniel Stodden wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 03:31 -0500, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-03-10 at 03:33 +0000, Daniel Stodden wrote:
> > > > is an overall pita and I've had the pleasure several times now.
> > >
> > > Merging it into what? xen/stable-2.6.32.x or some newer upstream version
> > > based tree?
> > Newer upstream. Otherwise I wouldn't bother. It's certainly not a common
> > operation, I was just suprised how much garbage is involved.
> After looking at the series, I think reverting on that topic branch
> might just risk more issues in trees which already pulled the current
> branch, and gathering the right diffs from Jeremy's tree to avoid that
> would probably take me longer than it's worth. More time than I can
> Since Konrad already seems to do the same with blkback, I'd like to
> propose a reset.
> Please check out one of the following trees at
> I'd redo xen/dom0/backend/blktap2 and repost the diffs sent around last
> week. I wouldn't mind keeping that branch in sync too, assuming it
> Trees above start at v2.6.32, with the transition to
> drivers/block/blktap, and moving on with Linus' tree from there on.
> Versions chosen above are where forward ports were necessary,
> respectively. Only fuzz left is mm/memory.c (export zap_page_range for
Can you make a different branch (or just send me the git commit)
for the one that touches mm/memory.c?
> Does this sound acceptable?
I looked briefly at blktap/next-2.6.38 and it looks like an ongoing
merge tree. Can you make a tree that is based off 2.6.38 (or some
branch of my 'stable/' ones). Basically trying to have something that is
easy to merge and is self-containted within one branch.
Xen-devel mailing list